Date
1 - 12 of 12
Introducing myself
|
Hello Spdx-legal. My name is J. Simmons (yes, I go by just the initial "J."). I found my way to Spdx-legal by way of npm and an interest in Open Source Hardware (OSHW) licensing. I am currently working on a project to standardize how developers document and share OSHW source materials (http://sliderule.io - warning the Sliderule repo is about to undergo some series reorganization/refactoring). We are re-purposing npm for parts of the functionality of the project and as such I am interested in discussing if (and how) OSHW licenses could be included in SPDX.
|
|
|
|
Andrew Katz
Hi J.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
As someone who is heavily involved in Open Hardware licensing (I wrote the Solderpad open hardware wrapper for the Apache 2.0 license, and I’m also involved in the drafting team of the Cern OHL), I’m also interested in this topic. Best Andrew On 21 Oct 2018, at 19:35, J. Simmons <jrs@...<mailto:jrs@...>> wrote:
Hello Spdx-legal. My name is J. Simmons (yes, I go by just the initial "J."). I found my way to Spdx-legal by way of npm and an interest in Open Source Hardware<https://www.oshwa.org/definition/> (OSHW) licensing. I am currently working on a project to standardize how developers document and share OSHW source materials (http://sliderule.io - warning the Sliderule repo is about to undergo some series reorganization/refactoring). We are re-purposing npm for parts of the functionality of the project and as such I am interested in discussing if (and how) OSHW licenses could be included in SPDX. Andrew Katz Partner Moorcrofts LLP andrew.katz@...<mailto:andrew.katz@...> +44 (0) 1628 470000 (Phone) +44 (0) 1628 470003 (Direct Dial) +44 (0) 7970 835001 (Mobile) Thames House, Mere Park, Dedmere Road, Marlow, Bucks SL7 1PB [cid:imagee6beb5.PNG@...]<https://www.moorcrofts.com> Corporate Law | Technology Law | Commercial Law | Employment Law | Employee Incentivisation & Share Schemes | Intellectual Property Law | Commercial Property Law | Secured Lending [cid:imageb17378.PNG@...]<https://moorcrofts.com/moorcrofts-named-finalists-in-women-in-business-awards/>[cid:image120839.PNG@...]<https://moorcrofts.com/moorcrofts-named-finalists-in-women-in-business-awards/> Registered in England & Wales OC 311818 Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority This email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please let us know. we store email addresses and the names of addressees to assist with future correspondence. Please be aware of the increase in fraud and cyber crime. any email that appears to come from Moorcrofts LLP which provides different bank details or indicates a change of our bank details is unlikely to be genuine. You should not act on any information contained in the email or reply to it. Instead please contact us immediately to check our account details 
|
|
|
|
Nice to meet you, Andrew. Thanks for your work on Solderpad and CERN OHL. I use CERN OHL on Holoseat and have been meaning to get to know Solderpad better as Mach 30 prefers Apache style licensing for our hardware projects.
|
|
|
|
J Lovejoy
Hi J, Andrew,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Welcome to SPDX-legal! Yes, it would be great to bring the open source hardware community into the fold. I think the easiest place to start is by using SPDX license identifiers on hardware designs or other related documents in a similar was as are used in source files - see: https://spdx.org/ids for example. Of course, we’d need to make sure we have the various open source hardware licenses on the SPDX License List first - we already include all the CC licenses and some open data licenses, so I don’t see any reason not to include open hardware licenses - I’d really like to hear some thoughts from others in the SPDX community on that one. Thanks, Jilayne
|
|
|
|
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:46 PM J Lovejoy <opensource@...> wrote:
Sounds good to me. |
|
|
|
Dave Marr
Ditto. SPDX can be useful within the procurement/supply chain across both software and hardware.
From: Spdx-legal@... <Spdx-legal@...>
On Behalf Of Michael Dolan
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 4:28 PM To: J Lovejoy <opensource@...> Cc: andrew.katz@...; jrs@...; SPDX-legal <Spdx-legal@...> Subject: Re: Introducing myself
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:46 PM J Lovejoy <opensource@...> wrote:
Sounds good to me. |
|
|
|
Alan Tse
I think it’d be useful but do wonder if our reliance on the OSD will be an appropriate guideline.
From: Spdx-legal@... [mailto:Spdx-legal@...]
On Behalf Of Dave Marr
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 4:41 PM To: Michael Dolan <mdolan@...>; J Lovejoy <opensource@...> Cc: andrew.katz@...; jrs@...; SPDX-legal <Spdx-legal@...> Subject: Re: Introducing myself
Ditto. SPDX can be useful within the procurement/supply chain across both software and hardware.
From: Spdx-legal@... <Spdx-legal@...>
On Behalf Of Michael Dolan
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:46 PM J Lovejoy <opensource@...> wrote:
Sounds good to me. |
|
|
Welcome to SPDX-legal!Thanks! Happy to be here. Yes, it would be great to bring the open source hardware community into the fold.That was just what I was hoping to hear. Of course, we’d need to make sure we have the various open source hardware licenses on the SPDX License List firstYup, I am happy to submit one or two as test cases, I just wanted to give fair warning that hardware licenses were on their way before I tossed in what might have been wildly unexpected submissions. I think it’d be useful but do wonder if our reliance on the OSD will be an appropriate guideline.I think that is an important question. Would the group be willing to entertain the idea of extending the guidelines to include the OHSW Definition when looking at OSHW licenses as a means of addressing that concern? |
|
|
|
J Lovejoy
I’ve just added an issue to consider adding the OHSW (as well as an open data) reference to our license inclusion guideline here: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/719
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We have a fair amount of topics to cover at the next couple upcoming meetings, but we can carry on this conversation here in the meantime, and I think it’s also fine to start submitting the licenses for consideration so they are in the queue. Jilayne
|
|
|
|
Bradley M. Kuhn <bkuhn@...>
J Lovejoy wrote:
we already include all the CC licensesWhile I'd love to see all the CC licenses included, they aren't. :) (Not trying to open that discussion again -- just wanted to correct the typo Jilayne made there.) -- Bradley M. Kuhn Pls. support the charity where I work, Software Freedom Conservancy: https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/ |
|
|
|
J Lovejoy
Hi Bradley,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Are you referring to the remaining issue, as discussed here: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/618 ? We did change the full names, as I think you raised (e.g., unproved and international). I believe the remaining issue has to do with other language translations? (a larger issue that impacts more than just CC licenses, to be fair) Jilayne
|
|
|
|
Brad Edmondson
Different Brad here (for those just joining the SPDX discussion). I'm also in favor of considering open source hardware licenses, and look forward to the discussion about guidelines. Bradley, I'm also curious as to what is missing, in your view. Thanks all, On Wed, Oct 31, 2018, 18:22 J Lovejoy <opensource@... wrote:
|
|
|